Exhibit 10.1.2
 Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ No
     o Yes
 
 AMENDMENT TO
 CONTRACTOR SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR
 NUMBER PORTABILITY ADMINISTRATION CENTER / SERVICE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
 CLARIFICATIONS ON QUALIFYING AS A USER
AND USE OF USER DATA
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 1




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ No
     o Yes
 Table of Contents
 1.
    
    PARTIES
    
    
    62.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE; TERM; AND DEFINED TERMS
    
    
    62.1
    
    Effective Date and Term
    
    
    62.2
    
    Limited Termination
    
    
    62.3
    
    Defined Terms
    
    
    73.
    
    LIMITED REVIEW AND CAP
    
    
    74.
    
    SINGLE NUE PROCESS
    
    
    75.
    
    CONSIDERATION RECITAL
    
    
    86.
    
    CLARIFICATIONS WITH RESPECT TO MASTER AGREEMENT
    
    
    96.1
    
    No Service Level Requirements, Benchmarking Process or Gateway Evaluation Process
    
    
    96.2
    
    Failure to Perform Material Obligations
    
    
    97.
    
    APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
    
    
    98.
    
    IMPACTS ON MASTER AGREEMENT
    
    
    109.
    
    MODIFICATION OF AND AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER AGREEMENT
    
    
    104.2 NPAC/SMS Users and User Agreements
    
    
    10(a) Exclusive Provisions Regarding Users Generally
    
    
    10(b) Categorization of Applicants and Evaluation of New User Applications
    
    
    11(1) Categorization of Applicants
    
    
    11(2) Qualification as a User
    
    
    12(A) Qualification Generally
    
    
    12(B) Limited Referral to Customer
    
    
    12(C) Contractors and Contractor Affiliates Qualification as a User
    
    
    12(D) Consideration of Use of User Data; Permitted Uses
    
    
    13(i) Source and Basis of Permitted Use Determination
    
    
    13(ii) Permitted Use Defined
    
    
    14(iii) Definitions Applicable to the Determination of a Permitted Use
    
    
    14(iv) Data Derived, Translated, or Transformed from User Data or Merged with User Data
    
    
    16(v) Clarifications to LSMS Restriction
    
    
    16(E) Continued Qualification as a User and Continued Permitted Uses of User Data
    
    
    17(c) New User Evaluator Process
    
    
    17(1) Overview of the NUE and the NUE Process
    
    
    17(2) Scope and Timing of NUE Reviews
    
    
    17(A) Permitted Use Review
    
    
    17
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 2




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ No
     o Yes
 (B) Data Provisioning Review
    
    
    18(C) Pricing Review
    
    
    20(D) Payment Review
    
    
    22(3) Findings Reports Defined
    
    
    23(A) Contents of Each Findings Report
    
    
    23(B) New User Findings Report
    
    
    23(C) Administrator User Service Findings Report
    
    
    23(D) Misuse Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    24(4) Limitations on NUE and NUE Process
    
    
    24(5) Selection of the NUE
    
    
    25(A) Initial NUE and First Successor NUE
    
    
    25(B) Successor NUE
    
    
    25(C) Qualifications of the NUE
    
    
    26(D) Engagement of the NUE
    
    
    26(E) NUE Start Date
    
    
    27(G) Unavailability of NUE
    
    
    27(6) Performance of NUE Process
    
    
    28(A) PTRS Applicants other than Contractor or Affiliates of Contractor
    
    
    28(i) Delivery of Information for Permitted Use Review
    
    
    28(ii) Permitted Use Review and New User Findings Report
    
    
    28(I) Time Periods
    
    
    28(II) Required Findings Statement and Explanation
    
    
    28(iii)Action Following Issuance of, or Failure to Timely Issue, New User Findings Report
    
    
    29(B) Contractor User Services
    
    
    30(i) Delivery of Information for NUE Reviews of Existing User Services and New User
Services
    
    
    30(I) Upon Commencement of NUE Process
    
    
    30(II) Prior to Commercial Launch
    
    
    30(III)Annually or After Affiliation Event
    
    
    31(IV) Resubmissions of New User Applications
    
    
    31(ii) Specific NUE Reviews and Administrator User Service Findings Report
    
    
    32(I) Time Periods
    
    
    32(II) Required Findings Statement and Explanation
    
    
    32(aa) Cumulative Findings
    
    
    33(bb) Separate Findings
    
    
    33(cc) Required Explanation
    
    
    36(iii) Action Following Issuance of, or Failure to Timely Issue, an Administrator
User Service Findings Report
    
    
    37(I) New User Services
    
    
    37(II) Existing User Services and Acquired User Services
    
    
    38(C) Misuse Allegation
    
    
    39(i) Definition
    
    
    39(ii) Circumstance
    
    
    40
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 3




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ No
     o Yes
 (iii) Specific NUE Reviews and Misuse Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    40(I) Time Periods
    
    
    40(II) Required Findings Statement and Explanation
    
    
    41(aa) Cumulative Findings
    
    
    41(AA) PTRS and Service Provider Users
    
    
    41(BB) User Services of Contractor and Affiliates of Contractor
    
    
    41(bb) Separate Findings
    
    
    42(cc) Required Explanation
    
    
    45(iv) Action Following Issuance of Misuse Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    45(I) PTRS and Service Provider Misuse Allegation Findings Reports
    
    
    45(II) Contractor and Affiliates of Contractor Misuse Allegation Findings Reports
    
    
    46(7) Evidence of Satisfaction
    
    
    48(A) Permitted Use Requirement
    
    
    48(B) Data Provisioning Requirement
    
    
    48(i) Content Requirement
    
    
    48(ii) Access Requirement
    
    
    49(C) Pricing Requirement
    
    
    49(D) Payment Requirement
    
    
    50(E) Customer Interaction with New User Evaluator
    
    
    50(d) Appeal and Dispute Resolution Processes and Procedures
    
    
    51(1) Generally
    
    
    51(2) Appeals Regarding New User Findings Report
    
    
    51(A) Customer Evaluation
    
    
    51(i) Initiation of a Customer Evaluation
    
    
    51(ii) Conduct of a Customer Evaluation
    
    
    52(iii) Consequences of and Further Rights With Respect to the Customers New User
Findings Report
    
    
    52(I) Original Affirmative Permitted Use Finding in NUEs New User Findings Report
    
    
    52(II) Original Negative Permitted Use Finding in NUEs New User Findings Report
    
    
    53(III) Original Indeterminate Permitted Use Finding in NUEs New User Findings
Report or Failure Timely to Issue a Findings Report
    
    
    54(IV) Effect if No Arbitration
    
    
    54(B) Arbitration
    
    
    54(3) Appeals Regarding an Administrator User Service Findings Report
    
    
    55(A) Customer Evaluation
    
    
    55(i) Initiation of a Customer Evaluation
    
    
    55(ii) Conduct of a Customer Evaluation
    
    
    56(iii) Consequences of and Further Rights With to the Customers Administrator
User Service Findings Report
    
    
    56(I) Original Affirmative Administrator User Service Finding in NUEs
Administrator User Services Finding Report
    
    
    56(II) Original Negative Administrator User Service Finding in
NUEs Administrator User Service Findings Report
    
    
    57
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 4




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ No
     o Yes
 (III) Original Indeterminate Administrator User Service Finding in NUEs
Administrator User Service Findings Report or Failure to Timely
Issue a Findings Report
    
    
    58(IV) Effect if No Arbitration
    
    
    58(B) Arbitration
    
    
    58(4) Appeals Protests Regarding Misuse Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    59(A) PTRS and Service Provider Misuse Allegation Findings Reports
    
    
    59(i) Customer Evaluation
    
    
    59(I) Initiation of a Customer Evaluation
    
    
    59(II) Conduct of a Customer Evaluation
    
    
    60(III) Consequences of and Further Rights With Respect to the Customers Misuse
Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    60(aa) Original Affirmative Permitted Use Finding in NUEs Misuse Allegation
Findings Report
    
    
    61(bb) Original Negative PTRS or Service Provider Permitted Use Finding in
NUEs Misuse Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    61(cc) Original Indeterminate PTRS or Service Provider Permitted Use
Finding in NUEs Misuse Allegation Findings Report or Failure
Timely to Issue a Findings Report
    
    
    62(IV) Effect if No Arbitration
    
    
    63(ii) Arbitration
    
    
    63(B) Contractor and Affiliates of Contractor Misuse Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    63(i) Customer Evaluation
    
    
    63(I) Initiation of a Customer Evaluation
    
    
    63(II) Conduct of a Customer Evaluation
    
    
    64(III) Consequences of and Further Rights With Respect to the Customers Misuse
Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    65(aa) Original Affirmative Administrator User Service Finding in NUEs Misuse
Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    65(bb) Original Negative Administrator User Service Finding in NUEs Misuse
Allegation Findings Report
    
    
    65(cc) Original Indeterminate Administrator User Service Finding in NUEs Misuse
Allegation Findings Report or Failure to Timely Issue a Findings Report
    
    
    66(IV) Effect if No Arbitration
    
    
    67(ii) Arbitration
    
    
    67(e) Methods and Procedures
    
    
    67(1) NUE M&P
    
    
    67(2) New User Application M&P
    
    
    67(f) Customers Standard
    
    
    68(g) Use of Findings Reports
    
    
    68(h) New User Application
    
    
    6810.
    
    ACKNOWLEDGMENT
    
    
    6911.
    
    NOTICES
    
    
    6912.
    
    MISCELLANEOUS
    
    
    70
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 5




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 AMENDMENT NO. 62
UNDER CONTRACTOR SERVICES AGREEMENT
FOR NUMBER PORTABILITY ADMINISTRATION CENTER/SERVICE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
 Clarifications on Qualifying as a User and Use of User Data
 1.    PARTIES
 Amendment Master Agreement Master Agreements Contractor Customer Subscribing Customer
 2.    EFFECTIVE DATE; TERM; AND DEFINED TERMS
 Effective Date and Term
 Amendment Effective
Date Subscribing Customers
 
    
    Mid-Atlantic Carrier Acquisition Company, LLC
    
    LNP, LLC (Midwest)
    
    Northeast Carrier Acquisition Company, LLC
    
    Southeast Number Portability Administration Company, LLC
    
    Southwest Region Portability Company, LLC
    
    West Coast Portability Services, LLC
    
    Western Region Telephone Number Portability, LLC
 Limited Termination
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 6




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  Defined Terms
  3.    LIMITED REVIEW AND CAP
  4.    SINGLE NUE PROCESS
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 7




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 5.    CONSIDERATION RECITAL
 Dispute
   CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 8




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  6.    CLARIFICATIONS WITH RESPECT TO MASTER AGREEMENT
 No Service Level Requirements, Benchmarking Process or Gateway Evaluation Process
  Failure to Perform Material Obligations
  7.    APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
  None
    
    Functional Requirements SpecificationsNone
    
    Requirements Traceability MatrixNone
    
    System Design
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 9




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 None
    
    Detailed DesignNone
    
    Integration Test PlanNone
    
    System Test PlanNone
    
    NPAC Software Development Process PlanNone
    
    User Documentation
 8.    IMPACTS ON MASTER AGREEMENT
  þ
    
    Master AgreementNone
    
    Exhibit B Functional Requirements SpecificationNone
    
    Exhibit C Interoperable Interface SpecificationNone
    
    Exhibit E Pricing SchedulesNone
    
    Exhibit F Project Plan and Test ScheduleNone
    
    Exhibit G Service Level RequirementsNone
    
    Exhibit H Reporting and Monitoring RequirementsNone
    
    Exhibit J User Agreement FormNone
    
    Exhibit K External DesignNone
    
    Exhibit L Infrastructure/HardwareNone
    
    Exhibit M Software Escrow AgreementNone
    
    Exhibit O Intermodal Ported TN Identification Service AgreementNone
    
    Exhibit P LEAP Service AgreementNone
    
    Disaster RecoveryNone
    
    Back Up PlansNone
    
    Gateway Evaluation Process (Article 32 of Master Agreement)
 9.    MODIFICATION OF AND AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER AGREEMENT
     New User Application  New User Application Applicant
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 10




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  Determination of Qualification 
 Execution of a User Agreement  NPAC/SMS User Agreement User
Agreement
    PTRS
 (NUE)
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 11




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
    provided, however
    User Service
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 12




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 provided, however
 Affiliation Event
  (i)
    
    Source and Basis of Permitted Use Determination
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 13




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  (ii)
    
    Permitted Use Defined
 Permitted Use
 (iii)
    
    Definitions Applicable to the Determination of a Permitted Use
      CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 14




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 1
    
 1
    
    Network Maintenance is intended to be interpreted broadly, and includes, by way of
illustration and not limitation, the following:
    
    Using the activation broadcast to determine when systems (such as LIDB, CNAM, Voice
Mailbox, PSTN or other switching device, etc.) may be updated to reflect loss or gain of
a customer.
    
    Using the User Data to determine current SP to verify that a telephone number can be
ported from a current SP before programming a system to anticipate port-in of the number.
    
    Using the User Data to determine a TNs current SP to determine whether to take a
trouble report or to comply a legal request.
    
    Using the User Data to determine appropriate call routing translations.
    
    Using the User Data to administer a telephone number assignment system.
    
    Using the User Data to administer an inter-carrier billing system.
    
    Using the User Data to allow operator services system to determine whether a call may
be alternate billed (i.e., to identify serving carrier to determine whether contract is
in place).
    
    Using the User Data to administer databases used for network maintenance purposes. CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 15




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  (iv)
    
    Data Derived, Translated, or Transformed from User Data or Merged with User
Data
    (v)
    
    Clarifications to LSMS Restriction
 In the Matter of Telephone Number Portability Cost Recovery Order
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 16




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (E)
    
    Continued Qualification as a User and Continued Permitted Uses of User
Data
   NUE Process
  NUE Review NUE Reviews Findings Report Findings Reports
    Permitted Use Review Permitted Use Requirement)
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 17




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
       Data Provisioning Review
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 18




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 Data Provisioning Requirement Data Provisioning
Requirements
      Content Requirement Content Requirement
 Access Requirement Access Requirement
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 19




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  Pricing Review User Service Contracts Pricing Requirement, Pricing Requirements
       Direct Test  Direct Test
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 20




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 Indirect Test Indirect Test
  
    
    the inclusion in a User Services Contract of commercial terms and
conditions, including pricing mechanisms such as the bundling of other products or
services offered by Contractor or Affiliates of Contractor which do not include
NPAC/SMS Services, access to the NPAC/SMS or User Data (whether or not a User
Service), or providing discounts associated with or related to User Service
transaction volumes, to a customer of a User Service;
    
    the provision of a User Service that inherently results in TN Porting Events
(e.g., Service Order Administration, Local Service Request, etc.), if the Pricing
Requirement is otherwise satisfied; or
    
    activity that merely results in consequential or incidental TN Porting
Events, if the Pricing Requirement is otherwise satisfied.
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 21




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
    Payment Review Payment Requirement Payment Requirements
 Invoice Requirement  Invoice
Requirement
 Actual Payment Requirement  Actual Payment Requirement
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 22




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  (A)
    
    Contents of Each Findings Report
  (B)
    
    New User Findings Report
 New User Findings Report
 (C)
    
    Administrator User Service Findings Report
 Administrator User Service Findings Report
    CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 23




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  Acquired User Services List Acquired User Services
 (D)
    
    Misuse Allegation Findings Report
 Misuse Allegation Findings Report
      CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 24




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
   (A)
    
    Initial NUE and First Successor NUE
 Initial NUE First Successor NUE
 (B)
    
    Successor NUE
 Successor NUE
 .
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 25




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (C)
    
    Qualifications of the NUE
  (D)
    
    Engagement of the NUE
 (i)
    
    Written Agreement
 Automatic
Termination Criteria
 (ii)
    
    Initial NUE Term and Renewal Terms
 Initial NUE Term Renewal Terms NUE Term
 (iii)
    
    Non Renewal Rights and Termination Rights
 Non-Renewal
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 26




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  (E)
    
    NUE Start Date
 NUE Start Date
 (G)
    
    Unavailability of NUE
  Project Executive Committee ,
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 27




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
   (A)
    
    PTRS Applicants other than Contractor or Affiliates of Contractor
 (i)
    
    Delivery of Information for Permitted Use Review
  (ii)
    
    Permitted Use Review and New User Findings Report
 (I)
    
    Time Periods
 provided,
however
 (II)
    
    Required Findings Statement and Explanation
 Findings Statement Explanation of the
Findings Statement. a preponderance of the evidence Affirmative Permitted Use Finding a
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 28




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 preponderance of the evidence Negative Permitted Use Finding a preponderance of the evidence Indeterminate
Permitted Use Finding
 (iii)
    
    Action Following Issuance of, or Failure to Timely
Issue, New User Findings Report
      CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 29




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
   (B)
    
    Contractor User Services
 (i)
    
    Delivery of Information for NUE Reviews of Existing User
Services and New User Services
 (I)
    
    Upon Commencement of NUE Process
 Existing User Services
 (II)
    
    Prior to Commercial Launch
 New User Services New User Service commercial launch
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 30




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 provided, however
 (III)
    
    Annually or After Affiliation Event
  (IV)
    
    Resubmissions of New User Applications
   CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 31




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  (ii)
    
    Specific NUE Reviews and Administrator User Service
Findings Report
 (I)
    
    Time Periods
 provided, however
 (II)
    
    Required Findings Statement and Explanation
 Findings Statement Explanation of the Findings Statement. Cumulative Findings Separate Findings
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 32




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (aa)
    
    Cumulative Findings
  (Affirmative Administrator User Service Finding)
 Negative Administrator User
Service Finding
 Indeterminate Administrator User Service Finding
 (bb)
    
    Separate Findings
  Permitted Use Review: Permitted Use Requirement
 
    
    Affirmative Permitted Use Finding The NUE has determined that
by a preponderance of the evidencethe need to access any part of the NPAC/SMS and
the use or uses of User Data with respect to a User Service satisfies the Permitted
Use Requirement;
  
    
    Negative Permitted Use Finding The NUE has determined that by
a preponderance of the evidencethe need to access any part of the NPAC/SMS and the
use of User Data with respect to a User Service DOES NOT satisfy the Permitted Use
Requirement;
  
    
    Indeterminate Permitted Use Finding The NUE is unable to
determine by a preponderance of the evidencewhether the User Service satisfies or
does not satisfy the Permitted Use Requirements, that is, the NUE is unable to
render either an Affirmative Permitted Use Finding or a Negative Permitted User
Finding.
 Data Provisioning Review
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 33




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  
    
    Affirmative Data Provisioning Finding The NUE has determined
that there is not clear and convincing evidencethat either (1) the Content
Requirement is not satisfied, that is, there is not clear and convincing evidence
that the content of User Data obtained for and used in connection with the User
Service, including but not limited to its form and character, the fields included
therein, and the manner in which it can be read, is not exactly the same as is
available to all other Users under the terms of the User Agreement (an Affirmative
Content Requirement Finding) or (2) the Access Requirement is not satisfied, that
is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat the method, manner, mode, and
connectivity to the NPAC/SMS to obtain the User Data obtained for and used in
connection with the User Service are not exactly the same as are available to all
other Users under the terms of the User Agreement (an Affirmative Access
Requirement Finding)
  
    
    Negative Data Provisioning Finding The NUE has determined
that there is clear and convincing evidencethat either or both (1) the
Content Requirement is not satisfied, that is, there is clear and convincing
evidencethat the content of User Data obtained for and used in connection with the
User Service, including but not limited to its form and character, the fields
included therein, and the manner in which it can be read, is not exactly the same
as is available to all other Users under the terms of the User Agreement (a
Negative Content Requirement Finding) or (2) the Access Requirement is not
satisfied, that is, there is clear and convincing evidencethat the method, manner,
mode, and connectivity to the NPAC/SMS to obtain the User Data obtained for and
used in connection with the User Service are not exactly the same as are available
to all other Users under the terms of the User Agreement (a Negative Access
Requirement Finding)
  
    
    Indeterminate Data Provisioning Finding The NUE is unable to
determine that there is or is not clear and convincing evidencethat either or
both of the Content Requirement or the Access Requirement are not satisfied,
that is, the NUE is unable to render either an Affirmative Data Provisioning
Finding or a Negative Data Provisioning Finding.
 Pricing Review: Pricing Requirements
 
    
    Affirmative Pricing Finding The NUE has determined that there
is not clear and convincing evidencethat either (1) the Direct Test is not
satisfied, that is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat any pricing
term or condition set forth in a User Services Contract by and between Contractor
or an Affiliate of the Contractor as a User and its customer for the provision of a
User Service to that customer, or any
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 34




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 extension of any economic benefit to that customer set forth in the User Service
Contract, is expressed in the User Services Contract as directly related to either
(a) the number of TN Porting Events of such customer, or (b) the allocated share of
Service Element Charges under the Allocation Model for such customer as an
Allocated Payor for Services, or (c) any charges that have been or are assessed or
assessable under a User Agreement to or against such customer who is also a User
under a User Agreement (an Affirmative Direct Test Finding) or (2) the Indirect
Test is not satisfied, that is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat any
pricing term or condition or any economic benefit is provided or extended to a User
Services customer with respect to a User Service that is not incorporated in a
written User Service Contract for that User Service to that customer, and there is
not clear and convincing evidencethat any pricing term and condition or any
economic benefit provided or extended to a User Service customer is related to
either (a) the number of TN Porting Events of the User Service Contract customer,
or (b) the allocated share of Service Element Charges under the Allocation Model
for such customer as an Allocated Payor for Services, or (c) any charges that have
been or are assessed or assessable under a User Agreement to or against such
customer who is also a User under a User Agreement (an Affirmative Indirect Test
Finding)
  
    
    Negative Pricing Finding The NUE has determined that there is
clear and convincing evidencethat either or both (1) the Direct Test is
not satisfied, that is, there is clear and convincing evidencethat a pricing term
or condition set forth in a User Services Contract by and between Contractor or an
Affiliate of the Contractor as a User and its customer for the provision of a User
Service to that customer, or an extension of an economic benefit to that customer
set forth in the User Service Contract, is expressed in the User Services Contract
as directly related to either (a) the number of TN Porting Events of such customer,
or (b) the allocated share of Service Element Charges under the Allocation Model
for such customer as an Allocated Payor for Services, or (c) any charges that have
been or are assessed or assessable under a User Agreement to or against such
customer who is also a User under a User Agreement (a Negative Direct Test
Finding) or (2) the Indirect Test is not satisfied, that is, there is clear and
convincing evidencethat a pricing term or condition or an economic benefit is
provided or extended to a User Services customer with respect to a User Service
that is not incorporated in a written User Service Contract for that User Service
to that customer, or there is clear and convincing evidencethat a pricing term and
condition or an economic benefit provided or extended to a User Service customer is
related to either (a) the number of TN Porting Events of the User Service Contract
customer, or (b) the allocated share of Service Element Charges under the
Allocation Model for such customer as an Allocated Payor for Services, or (c) any
charges that have been or are assessed or assessable under a User Agreement to or
against such customer who is also a User under a User Agreement (an Negative
Indirect Test Finding)
  
    
    Indeterminate Pricing Finding The NUE is unable to determine
that there is or is not clear and convincing evidencethat either or both
of the Direct Test or the Indirect
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 35




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 Test are not satisfied, that is, the NUE is unable to render either an Affirmative
Pricing Finding or a Negative Pricing Finding.
 Payment Review
 
    
    Affirmative Payment Finding The NUE has determined that there is not
clear and convincing evidencethat either (1) the Invoice Requirement is not
satisfied, that is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat all applicable
invoices have been issued to Contractor and each Affiliate of Contractor that is a User
and that those invoices contain all applicable charges under Exhibit E of the Master
Agreement (an Affirmative Invoice Requirement Finding) or (2) the Actual Payment
Requirement is not satisfied, that is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat
full and timely payment or accounting treatment by Contractor and each Affiliate of
Contractor that is a User of all applicable charges under the User Agreement has
actually occurred (an Affirmative Actual Payment Finding)
  
    
    Negative Payment Finding The NUE has determined that there is clear and
convincing evidencethat either or both (1) the Invoice Requirement is not
satisfied, that is, there is clear and convincing evidencethat not all applicable
invoices under the User Agreement have been issued to Contractor and each Affiliate of
Contractor that is a User or that those invoices do not contain all applicable charges
under the User Agreement (a Negative Invoice Requirement Finding) or (2) the Actual
Payment Requirement is not satisfied, that is, there is clear and convincing evidence
that full and timely payment or accounting treatment by Contractor and each Affiliate of
Contractor that is a User of all applicable charges under the User Agreement has not
actually occurred (a Negative Actual Payment Requirement Finding);
  
    
    Indeterminate Payment Finding The NUE is unable to determine that there
is or is not clear and convincing evidencethat either or both of the Invoice
Requirement or the Actual Payment Requirement are not satisfied, that is, the NUE is
unable to render either an Affirmative Payment Finding or a Negative Payment Finding.
   CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 36




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (iii)
    
    Action Following Issuance of, or Failure to Timely Issue, an
Administrator User Service Findings Report
 (I)
    
    New User Services
     CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 37




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
   st
    CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 38




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  st
    (C)
    
    Misuse Allegation
 (i)
    
    Definition
 Misuse Allegation
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 39




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  (ii)
    
    Circumstance
   (iii)
    
    Specific NUE Reviews and Misuse Allegation Findings Report
 (I)
    
    Time Periods
  provided, however
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 40




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (II)
    
    Required Findings Statement and Explanation
 Findings Statement Explanation
of the Findings Statement. Cumulative
Findings Separate Findings
 (aa)
    
    Cumulative Findings
 (AA)
    
    PTRS and Service Provider Users
 a preponderance of the evidence Affirmative PTRS or Service Provider Permitted Use Finding a preponderance of the evidence Negative PTRS or Service Provider Permitted Use Finding a preponderance of the evidence Indeterminate PTRS or Service Provider Permitted
Use Finding
 (BB)
    
    User Services of Contractor and Affiliates of Contractor
  (Affirmative Administrator User Service Finding
 Negative Administrator User Service Finding
 Indeterminate Administrator User Service Finding
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 41




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (bb)
    
    Separate Findings
  Permitted Use Review:
 
    
    Affirmative Permitted Use Finding The NUE has determined that by a
preponderance of the evidencethe need to access any part of the NPAC/SMS and the actual
use or uses of User Data with respect to a User Service that is the subject of the Misuse
Allegation satisfies the Permitted Use Requirement.
  
    
    Negative Permitted Use Finding The NUE has determined that by a
preponderance of the evidencethe need to access any part of the NPAC/SMS and the actual
use or uses of User Data with respect to a User Service that is the subject of the Misuse
Allegation does not satisfy the a Permitted Use Requirement.
  
    
    which is the subject of the Misuse Allegation Indeterminate Permitted Use
Finding The NUE is unable to determine by a preponderance of the evidencewhether
the need to access any part of the NPAC/SMS and the actual use or uses of User Data with
respect to a User Service that is the subject of the Misuse Allegation satisfies or does
not satisfy the Permitted Use Requirement, that is, the NUE is unable to render either an
Affirmative Permitted Use Finding or a Negative Permitted User Finding.
 Data Provisioning Review
 
    
    Affirmative Data Provisioning Finding The NUE has determined that there
is not clear and convincing evidencethat either (1) the Content Requirement is
not satisfied, that is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat the content of
User Data obtained for and used in connection with the User Service, including but not
limited to its form and character, the fields included therein, and the manner in which
it can be read, was not or is not exactly the same as is available to all other Users
under the terms of the User
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 42




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 Agreement (an Affirmative Content Requirement Finding) or (2) the Access Requirement
is not satisfied, that is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat the method,
manner, mode, and connectivity to the NPAC/SMS to obtain the User Data obtained for and
used in connection with the User Service were not or are not exactly the same as are
available to all other Users under the terms of the User Agreement (an Affirmative
Access Requirement Finding)
  
    
    Negative Data Provisioning Finding The NUE has determined that there is
clear and convincing evidencethat either or both (1) the Content Requirement is
not satisfied, that is, there is clear and convincing evidencethat the content of User
Data obtained for and used in connection with the User Service, including but not
limited to its form and character, the fields included therein, and the manner in which
it can be read, were not or are not exactly the same as are available to all other Users
under the terms of the User Agreement (a Negative Content Requirement Finding) or (2)
the Access Requirement is not satisfied, that is, there is clear and convincing evidence
that the method, manner, mode, and connectivity to the NPAC/SMS to obtain the User Data
obtained for and used in connection with the User Service were not or are not exactly
the same as are available to all other Users under the terms of the User Agreement (a
Negative Access Requirement Finding)
  
    
    Indeterminate Data Provisioning Finding The NUE is unable to determine
that there is or is not clear and convincing evidencethat either or both of the
Content Requirement or the Access Requirement are not satisfied, that is, the NUE is
unable to render either an Affirmative Data Provisioning Finding or a Negative Data
Provisioning Finding.
 Pricing Review: Pricing
Requirements
 
    
    Affirmative Pricing Finding The NUE has determined that there is not
clear and convincing evidencethat either (1) the Direct Test is not satisfied,
that is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat any pricing term or condition
set forth in a User Services Contract by and between Contractor or an Affiliate of
Contractor as a User and its customer for the provision of a User Service to that
customer, or any extension of any economic benefit to that customer set forth in the User
Service Contract, is expressed in the User Services Contract as directly related to
either (a) the number of TN Porting Events of such customer, or (b) the allocated share
of Service Element Charges under the Allocation Model for such customer as an Allocated
Payor for Services, or (c) any charges that have been or are assessed or assessable under
a User Agreement to or against such customer who is also a User under a User Agreement
(an Affirmative Direct Test Finding) or (2) the Indirect Test is not satisfied, that
is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat any pricing term or condition or any
economic benefit is provided or extended to a User Services customer with respect to a
User Service that is not incorporated in a written User Service Contract for that User
Service to that customer, and
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 43




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 clear and convincing evidence Affirmative Indirect Test Finding
  
    
    Negative Pricing Finding The NUE has determined that there is clear and
convincing evidencethat either or both (1) the Direct Test is not satisfied,
that is, there is clear and convincing evidencethat a pricing term or condition set
forth in a User Services Contract by and between Contractor or an Affiliate of the
Contractor as a User and its customer for the provision of a User Service to that
customer, or an extension of an economic benefit to that customer set forth in the User
Service Contract, is expressed in the User Services Contract as directly related to
either (a) the number of TN Porting Events of such customer, or (b) the allocated share
of Service Element Charges under the Allocation Model for such customer as an Allocated
Payor for Services , or (c) any charges that have been or are assessed or assessable
under a User Agreement to or against such customer who is also a User under a User
Agreement (a Negative Direct Test Finding) or (2) the Indirect Test is not satisfied,
that is, there is clear and convincing evidencethat a pricing term or condition or an
economic benefit is provided or extended to a User Services customer with respect to a
User Service that is not incorporated in a written User Service Contract for that User
Service to that customer, or there is clear and convincing evidencethat a pricing term
and condition or an economic benefit provided or extended to a User Service customer is
related to either (a) the number of TN Porting Events of the User Service Contract
customer, or (b) the allocated share of Service Element Charges under the Allocation
Model for such customer as an Allocated Payor for Services, or (c) any charges that have
been or are assessed or assessable under a User Agreement to or against such customer
who is also a User under a User Agreement (an Negative Indirect Test Finding)
  
    
    Indeterminate Pricing Finding The NUE is unable to determine that there
is or is not clear and convincing evidencethat either or both of the Direct Test
or the Indirect Test are not satisfied, that is, the NUE is unable to render either an
Affirmative Pricing Finding or a Negative Pricing Finding.
 Payment Review: Payment
Requirements
 
    
    Affirmative Payment Finding The NUE has determined that there is not
clear and convincing evidencethat either (1) the Invoice Requirement is not
satisfied, that is, there is not clear and convincing evidencethat all applicable
invoices under the User Agreement have been issued to Contractor and each Affiliate of
Contractor that is a User
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 44




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 Affirmative Invoice Requirement Finding clear and convincing evidence Affirmative Actual
Payment Finding
  
    
    Negative Payment Finding The NUE has
determined clear and convincing evidencethat
either or both (1) the Invoice Requirement is
not satisfied, that is, there is clear and
convincing evidencethat not all applicable
invoices under the User Agreement have been
issued to Contractor and each Affiliate of
Contractor that is a User or that those
invoices do not contain all applicable
charges under the User Master Agreement (a
Negative Invoice Requirement Finding) or
(2) the Actual Payment Requirement is not
satisfied, that is, there is clear and
convincing evidencethat full and timely
payment or accounting treatment by Contractor
and each Affiliate of Contractor that is a
User of all applicable charges under the User
Agreement has not actually occurred (an
Negative Actual Payment Requirement
Finding)
  
    
    Indeterminate Payment Finding The NUE is
unable to clear and convincing evidencethat
either or both of the Invoice Requirement or
the Actual Payment Requirement are not
satisfied, that is, the NUE is unable to
render either an Affirmative Pricing Finding
or a Negative Pricing Finding.
   (iv)
    
    Action Following Issuance of Misuse Allegation Findings Report
 (I)
    
    PTRS and Service Provider Misuse Allegation
Findings Reports
   CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 45




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 st st
 st
   (II)
    
    Contractor and Affiliates of Contractor Misuse
Allegation Findings Reports
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 46




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  st
     st
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 47




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
      
    
    Applicants need to access any part of the NPAC/SMS and the intended or actual use or
uses of User Data
    Officer Content Certification
 
    
    Sampling of TN records in Contractors SOA/LSMS systems for provisioning its User
Services to confirm that the data obtained from the NPAC/SMS is no different from what
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 48




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 is available to other Users (e.g., in either NPAC/SMS broadcasts or Bulk Data Downloads).
    
    Help Desk tickets for requests by Contractor as User (e.g., for Bulk Data Downloads) to
confirm handling is consistent with what is required to be provided to any User making a
similar request.
 provided
  Officer Access Certification
 
    
    Contractors communications invoice for a circuit(s) from Contractors SOA/LSMS
facilities to a telecommunications central office.
    
    Contractors detailed engineering circuit diagram illustrating the circuitry between
its facilities and the telecommunications central office.
    
    Contractors Certification Testing (in accordance with SOW24, as amended) results as
recorded by NPAC/SMS personnel to verify that Contractors SOA/LSMS systems deployed to
support its Contract User Services are subject to same testing requirements as those
imposed on any User system.
  Officer Pricing
Certification)
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 49




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  
    
    a statistically-significant sample, determined in the NUEs professional judgment, of
User Services Contracts from a Contractor-provided list of (A) current User Services
Contracts and (B) new, amended, expired, and terminated User Services Contracts; and
     
    
    Contractors invoices to itself as a User; and
    
    Depending on Contractors actual method, either (i) Contractors cancelled check, wire
transfer confirmation, or other similar evidence of payment, or (ii) Contractors
accounting treatment reflecting the recognition of payment, but only that entry subject
to the Payment Requirement, and no other record whatsoever.
   CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 50




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
             CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 51




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
     Customer Evaluation de novo. Customers New User
Findings Report
 (iii)
    
    Consequences of and Further Rights With Respect to the
Customers New User Findings Report
  (I)
    
    Original Affirmative Permitted Use Finding in
NUEs New User Findings Report
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 52




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
    (II)
    
    Original Negative Permitted Use Finding in
NUEs New User Findings Report
     CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 53




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (III)
    
    Original Indeterminate Permitted Use Finding in NUEs New User
Findings Report or Failure Timely to Issue a Findings Report
         CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 54




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
            CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 55




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  Customer Evaluation de novo Customers Administrator
User Service Findings Report
 (iii)
    
    Consequences of and Further Rights With
Respect to the Customers Administrator User Service Findings Report
  (I)
    
    Original Affirmative
Administrator User Service Finding in NUEs Administrator User
Services Finding Report
    CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 56




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
   (II)
    
    Original Negative Administrator User Service Finding in NUEs
Administrator User Service Findings Report
     CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 57




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (III)
    
    Original Indeterminate Administrator User Service
Finding in NUEs Administrator User Service Findings Report or Failure to
Timely Issue a Findings Report
         CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 58




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)
 SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
            CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 59




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
   (II)
    
    Conduct of a Customer Evaluation
 Customer Evaluation de novo. Customers Misuse Allegation Findings Report
 (III)
    
    Consequences of and Further Rights With Respect
to the Customers Misuse Allegation Findings Report
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 60




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (aa)
    
    Original Affirmative Permitted
Use Finding in NUEs Misuse Allegation Findings Report
     (bb)
    
    Original Negative PTRS or Service
Provider Permitted Use Finding in NUEs Misuse Allegation
Findings Report
   CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 61




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
   (cc)
    
    Original Indeterminate PTRS or
Service Provider Permitted Use Finding in NUEs Misuse
Allegation Findings Report or Failure Timely to Issue a Findings
Report
     CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 62




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  (IV)
    
    Effect if No Arbitration
  (ii)
    
    Arbitration
  (B)
    
    Contractor and Affiliates of Contractor Misuse Allegation Findings Report
 (i)
    
    Customer Evaluation
 (I)
    
    Initiation of a Customer Evaluation
     CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 63




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
     (II)
    
    Conduct of a Customer Evaluation
 Customer Evaluation de novo. Customers Misuse Allegation Findings Report
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 64




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 (III)
    
    Consequences of and Further Rights With Respect
to the Customers Misuse Allegation Findings Report
  (aa)
    
    Original Affirmative Administrator User
Service Finding in NUEs Misuse Allegation Findings Report
     (bb)
    
    Original Negative Administrator User
Service Finding in NUEs Misuse Allegation Findings Report
   CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 65




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
   (cc)
    
    Original Indeterminate Administrator
User Service Finding in NUEs Misuse Allegation Findings Report or
Failure to Timely Issue a Findings Report
     CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 66




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  (IV)
    
    Effect if No Arbitration
  (ii)
    
    Arbitration
  (e)
    
    Methods and Procedures
 (1)
    
    NUE M&P
 NUE Process M&P
 (2)
    
    New User Application M&P
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 67




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  (f)
    
    Customers Standard
  (g)
    
    Use of Findings Reports
  (h)
    
    New User Application
  CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 68




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  10.
    
    ACKNOWLEDGMENT
 Assignment Agreement In the Matter of Request of Lockheed Martin Corporation and Warburg, Pincus & Co. for
Review of the Transfer of the Lockheed Martin Communications Industry Services Business Warburg Transfer Order North American Numbering Plan Administration;
NeuStar, Inc., Request to Allow Certain Transactions Without Prior Commission Approval and to
Transfer Ownership
 11.
    
    NOTICES
  If to Contractor:
    
    Michael OConnor
Vice President, Customer Relations
NeuStar, Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza
Sterling, VA 20166
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 69




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 with a copy to:
    
    Stephen Addicks
Project Executive
NeuStar, Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza
Sterling, VA 20166and to:
    
    General Counsel
NeuStar, Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza
Sterling, VA 20166
 12.
    
    MISCELLANEOUS
 a.
    
    Except as specifically modified and amended hereby, all the provisions of the Master
Agreement and the User Agreements entered into with respect thereto, and all exhibits and
schedules thereto, shall remain unaltered and in full force and effect in accordance with
their terms. From and after the Amendment Effective Date hereof, any reference in the Master
Agreement to itself and any Article, Section or subsections thereof or to any Exhibit thereto,
or in any User Agreement to itself or to the Master Agreement and applicable to any time from
and after the Amendment Effective Date hereof, shall be deemed to be a reference to such
agreement, Article, Section, subsection or Exhibit, as modified and amended by this Amendment.
From and after the Amendment Effective Date, this Amendment shall be a part of the Master
Agreement, including its Exhibits, and, as such, shall be subject to the terms and conditions
therein. Each of the respective Master Agreements with respect to separate Service Areas
remains an independent agreement regarding the rights and obligations of each of the Parties
thereto with respect to such Service Area, and neither this Amendment nor any other instrument
shall join or merge any Master Agreement with any other, except by the express written
agreement of the Parties thereto.b.
    
    If any provision of this Amendment is held invalid or unenforceable the remaining provision
of this Amendment shall become null and void and be of no further force or effect. If by rule,
regulation, order, opinion or decision of the Federal Communications Commission or any other
regulatory body having jurisdiction or delegated authority with respect to the subject matter
of this Amendment or the Master Agreement, this Amendment is required to be rescinded or is
declared ineffective or void in whole or in part, whether temporarily, permanently or ab
initio (an Ineffectiveness Determination), immediately upon such Ineffectiveness
Determination and without any requirement on any party to appeal, protest or otherwise seek
clarification of such Ineffectiveness Determination, this Amendment shall be rescinded and of
no further force or effect retroactively to the Amendment Effective Date. Consequently, the
Master Agreement in effect immediately prior to the Amendment Effective Date shall continue in
full force and effect in accordance with its terms, unchanged or modified in any way by this
Amendment.
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 70




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
 c.
    
    This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts and by different parties hereto in
separate counterparts, with the same effect as if all parties had signed the same document.
All such counterparts shall be deemed an original, shall be construed together and shall
constitute one and the same instrument.d.
    
    If at any time hereafter a Customer, other than a Customer that is a party hereto desires to
become a party hereto, such Customer may become a party hereto by executing a joinder agreeing
to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Amendment, as modified from time to time.e.
    
    This Amendment is the joint work product of representatives of Customer and Contractor;
accordingly, in the event of ambiguities, no inferences will be drawn against either party,
including the party that drafted the Agreement in its final form.f.
    
    This Amendment sets forth the entire understanding between the Parties with regard to the
subject matter hereof and supercedes any prior or contemporaneous agreement, discussions,
negotiations or representations between the Parties, whether written or oral, with respect
thereto. The modifications, amendments and price concessions made herein were negotiated
together and collectively, and each is made in consideration of all of the other terms herein.
All such modifications, amendments and price concessions are interrelated and are dependent on
each other. No separate, additional or different consideration is contemplated with respect to
the modifications, amendments and price concessions herein.
 [THIS SPACE INENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 71




---



##### 



Amendment No. 62 (NE)SOW:
    
    þ Noo Yes
  CONTRACTOR: NeuStar, Inc.By:
    /s/ Michael OConnorIts: VP-CUSTOMER RELATIONSDate: 23 SEP 08 CUSTOMER: North American Portability Management LLC, as successor in interest to and on behalf of
the Northeast Carrier Acquisition Company, LLC
 By:
    /s/ Melvin ClayIts:       NAPM LLC CO-CHAIRDate:      9/17/2008By:
    /s/ Timothy DeckerIts: NAPM LLC Co-ChairDate: 9/17/2008 CONFIDENTIAL
 Page 72